Publications

Results 51–92 of 92

Search results

Jump to search filters

CaveMan Enterprise version 1.0 Software Validation and Verification

Hart, David

The U.S. Department of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve stores crude oil in caverns solution-mined in salt domes along the Gulf Coast of Louisiana and Texas. The CaveMan software program has been used since the late 1990s as one tool to analyze pressure mea- surements monitored at each cavern. The purpose of this monitoring is to catch potential cavern integrity issues as soon as possible. The CaveMan software was written in Microsoft Visual Basic, and embedded in a Microsoft Excel workbook; this method of running the CaveMan software is no longer sustainable. As such, a new version called CaveMan Enter- prise has been developed. CaveMan Enterprise version 1.0 does not have any changes to the CaveMan numerical models. CaveMan Enterprise represents, instead, a change from desktop-managed work- books to an enterprise framework, moving data management into coordinated databases and porting the numerical modeling codes into the Python programming language. This document provides a report of the code validation and verification testing.

More Details

Water Security Toolkit User Manual Version 1.2

Klise, Katherine A.; Siirola, John D.; Hart, David; Hart, William E.; Phillips, Cynthia A.; Haxton, Terranna; Murray, Regan; Janke, Robert; Taxon, Thomas; Laird, Carl; Seth, Arpan; Hackebeil, Gabriel; Mcgee, Shawn; Mann, Angelica

The Water Security Toolkit (WST) is a suite of open source software tools that can be used by water utilities to create response strategies to reduce the impact of contamination in a water distribution network . WST includes hydraulic and water quality modeling software , optimizati on methodologies , and visualization tools to identify: (1) sensor locations to detect contamination, (2) locations in the network in which the contamination was introduced, (3) hydrants to remove contaminated water from the distribution system, (4) locations in the network to inject decontamination agents to inactivate, remove, or destroy contaminants, (5) locations in the network to take grab sample s to help identify the source of contamination and (6) valves to close in order to isolate contaminate d areas of the network. This user manual describes the different components of WST , along w ith examples and case studies. License Notice The Water Security Toolkit (WST) v.1.2 Copyright c 2012 Sandia Corporation. Under the terms of Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000, there is a non-exclusive license for use of this work by or on behalf of the U.S. government. This software is distributed under the Revised BSD License (see below). In addition, WST leverages a variety of third-party software packages, which have separate licensing policies: Acro Revised BSD License argparse Python Software Foundation License Boost Boost Software License Coopr Revised BSD License Coverage BSD License Distribute Python Software Foundation License / Zope Public License EPANET Public Domain EPANET-ERD Revised BSD License EPANET-MSX GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) v.3 gcovr Revised BSD License GRASP AT&T Commercial License for noncommercial use; includes randomsample and sideconstraints executable files LZMA SDK Public Domain nose GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) v.2.1 ordereddict MIT License pip MIT License PLY BSD License PyEPANET Revised BSD License Pyro MIT License PyUtilib Revised BSD License PyYAML MIT License runpy2 Python Software Foundation License setuptools Python Software Foundation License / Zope Public License six MIT License TinyXML zlib License unittest2 BSD License Utilib Revised BSD License virtualenv MIT License Vol Common Public License vpykit Revised BSD License Additionally, some precompiled WST binary distributions might bundle other third-party executables files: Coliny Revised BSD License (part of Acro project) Dakota GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) v.2.1 PICO Revised BSD License (part of Acro project) i Revised BSD License Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met: * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. * Neither the name of Sandia National Laboratories nor Sandia Corporation nor the names of its con- tributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission. THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IM- PLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL SANDIA CORPORATION BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUD- ING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. ii Acknowledgements This work was supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development (Interagency Agreement # DW8992192801). The material in this document has been subject to technical and policy review by the U.S. EPA, and approved for publication. The views expressed by individual authors, however, are their own, and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of trade names, products, or services does not convey official U.S. EPA approval, endorsement, or recommendation. The Water Security Toolkit is an extension of the Threat Ensemble Vulnerability Assessment-Sensor Place- ment Optimization Tool (TEVA-SPOT), which was also developed with funding from the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development (Interagency Agreement # DW8992192801). The authors acknowledge the following individuals for their contributions to the devel- opment of TEVA-SPOT: Jonathan Berry (Sandia National Laboratories), Erik Boman (Sandia National Laboratories), Lee Ann Riesen (Sandia National Laboratories), James Uber (University of Cincinnati), and Jean-Paul Watson (Sandia National Laboratories). iii Acronyms ATUS American Time-Use Survey BLAS Basic linear algebra sub-routines CFU Colony-forming unit CVAR Conditional value at risk CWS Contamination warning system EA Evolutionary algorithm EDS Event detection system EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EC Extent of Contamination ERD EPANET results database file GLPK GNU Linear Programming Kit GRASP Greedy randomized adaptive sampling process HEX Hexadecimal HTML HyperText markup language INP EPANET input file LP Linear program MC Mass consumed MILP Mixed integer linear program MIP Mixed integer program MSX Multi-species extension for EPANET NFD Number of failed detections NS Number of sensors NZD Non-zero demand PD Population dosed PE Population exposed PK Population killed TAI Threat assessment input file TCE Tailed-conditioned expectation TD Time to detection TEC Timed extent of contamination TEVA Threat ensemble vulnerability assessment TSB Tryptic soy broth TSG Threat scenario generation file TSI Threat simulation input file VAR Value at risk VC Volume consumed WST Water Security Toolkit YML YAML configuration file format for WST iv Symbols Notation Definition Example { , } set brackets { 1,2,3 } means a set containing the values 1,2, and 3. [?] is an element of s [?] S means that s is an element of the set S . [?] for all s = 1 [?] s [?] S means that the statement s = 1 is true for all s in set S . P summation P n i =1 s i means s 1 + s 2 + * * * + s n . \ set minus S \ T means the set that contains all those elements of S that are not in set T . %7C given %7C is used to define conditional probability. P ( s %7C t ) means the prob- ability of s occurring given that t occurs. %7C ... %7C cardinality Cardinality of a set is the number of elements of the set. If set S = { 2,4,6 } , then %7C S %7C = 3. v

More Details

Combining water quality and operational data for improved event detection

Water Distribution Systems Analysis 2010 - Proceedings of the 12th International Conference, WDSA 2010

Hart, David; Mckenna, Sean A.; Murray, Regan; Haxton, Terra

Water quality signals from sensors provide a snapshot of the water quality at the monitoring station at discrete sample times. These data are typically processed by event detection systems to determine the probability of a water quality event occurring at each sample time. Inherent noise in sensor data and rapid changes in water quality due to operational actions can cause false alarms in event detection systems. While the event determination can be made solely on the data from each signal at the current time step, combining data across signals and backwards in time can provide a richer set of data for event detection. Here we examine the ability of algebraic combinations and other transformations of the raw signals to further decrease false alarms. As an example, using operational events such as one or more pumps turning on or off to define a period of decreased detection sensitivity is one approach to limiting false alarms. This method is effective when lag times are known or when the sensors are co-located with the equipment causing the change. The CANARY software was used to test and demonstrate these combinatorial techniques for improving sensitivity and decreasing false alarms on both background data and data with simulated events. Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. © 2012 ASCE.

More Details

Sensor placement for municipal water networks

Phillips, Cynthia A.; Boman, Erik G.; Carr, Robert D.; Hart, William E.; Berry, Jonathan; Watson, Jean-Paul; Hart, David; Mckenna, Sean A.; Riesen, Lee A.

We consider the problem of placing a limited number of sensors in a municipal water distribution network to minimize the impact over a given suite of contamination incidents. In its simplest form, the sensor placement problem is a p-median problem that has structure extremely amenable to exact and heuristic solution methods. We describe the solution of real-world instances using integer programming or local search or a Lagrangian method. The Lagrangian method is necessary for solution of large problems on small PCs. We summarize a number of other heuristic methods for effectively addressing issues such as sensor failures, tuning sensors based on local water quality variability, and problem size/approximation quality tradeoffs. These algorithms are incorporated into the TEVA-SPOT toolkit, a software suite that the US Environmental Protection Agency has used and is using to design contamination warning systems for US municipal water systems.

More Details

Integrating event detection system operation characteristics into sensor placement optimization

Hart, David; Hart, William E.; Mckenna, Sean A.; Phillips, Cynthia A.

We consider the problem of placing sensors in a municipal water network when we can choose both the location of sensors and the sensitivity and specificity of the contamination warning system. Sensor stations in a municipal water distribution network continuously send sensor output information to a centralized computing facility, and event detection systems at the control center determine when to signal an anomaly worthy of response. Although most sensor placement research has assumed perfect anomaly detection, signal analysis software has parameters that control the tradeoff between false alarms and false negatives. We describe a nonlinear sensor placement formulation, which we heuristically optimize with a linear approximation that can be solved as a mixed-integer linear program. We report the results of initial experiments on a real network and discuss tradeoffs between early detection of contamination incidents, and control of false alarms.

More Details

Impact of sensor detection limits on protecting water distribution systems from contamination events

Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management

McKenna, Sean A.; Hart, David; Yarrington, Lane

Real-time water quality sensors are becoming commonplace in water distribution systems. However, field deployable, contaminant-specific sensors are still in the development stage. As development proceeds, the necessary operating parameters of these sensors must be determined to protect consumers from accidental and malevolent contamination events. This objective can be quantified in several different ways including minimization of: the time necessary to detect a contamination event, the population exposed to contaminated water, the extent of the contamination within the network, and others. We examine the ability of a sensor set to meet these objectives as a function of both the detection limit of the sensors and the number of sensors in the network. A moderately sized distribution network is used as an example and different sized sets of randomly placed sensors are considered. For each combination of a certain number of sensors and a detection limit, the mean values of the different objectives across multiple random sensor placements are calculated. The tradeoff between the necessary detection limit in a sensor and the number of sensors is evaluated. Results show that for the example problem examined here, a sensor detection limit of 0.01 of the average source concentration is adequate for maximum protection. Detection of events is dependent on the detection limit of the sensors, but for those events that are detected, the values of the performance measures are not a function of the sensor detection limit. The results of replacing a single sensor in a network with a sensor having a much lower detection limit show that while this replacement can improve results, the majority of the additional events detected had performance measures of relatively low consequence. © 2006 ASCE.

More Details
Results 51–92 of 92
Results 51–92 of 92